Duration: 10/01/2026 to 09/30/2031

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

The U.S. equine industry contributes $177 billion in value and supports 2.2 million jobs (American Horse Council, 2023), yet rising costs of keeping horses are threatening the long-term viability of equine owners, businesses, and welfare organizations. Stakeholder surveys across multiple Northeast states identify financial challenges as the top barriers to sustainable horse ownership and management. Without coordinated regional research and educational support, these barriers will continue to limit participation in the equine industry, reduce welfare outcomes, and weaken rural economies.

The goal of this project is to build a more resilient equine economy by generating data-driven solutions that reduce costs, improve horse health, and enhance decision-making among horse owners, professionals, and welfare organizations. Objectives include: (1) conducting a multistate longitudinal survey to assess economic pressures, horse health, and management practices; (2) developing research and outreach on cost-effective pasture, forage, nutrition, and climate-adaptive management; (3) assess horse nutrition practices and develop cost-saving feeding strategies based on survey data; (4) development of extension resources.

Target audiences include horse owners, managers, veterinarians, welfare organizations, educators, and industry partners. Stakeholders will benefit through data-driven recommendations, cost-saving decision tools, improved welfare outcomes, and earlier detection of health issues that lead to substantial economic losses.

By integrating research, technology development, and coordinated multistate outreach, this project will generate actionable knowledge and tools that directly reduce the financial burden of horsekeeping and strengthen the economic and social sustainability of equine communities.

Statement of Issues and Justification

Overview: Stakeholders across the U.S. equine industry report rising costs as the top barrier to sustainable horse ownership and operation. Recent needs assessments from Pennsylvania, Kentucky, New Jersey, Maine, Delaware, and other states consistently identify rising expenses, such as feed, veterinary care, and facility maintenance as the top challenges facing owners and equine businesses. These concerns align with national trends: the annual cost of horse ownership has tripled or more since 2003 (American Horse Council, 2023), and general operating expenses now exceed inflation-adjusted 2012 values by 86–128% in some regions (Kentucky Equine Survey, 2022). Without intervention, these challenges will continue to reduce participation in the equine industry, strain welfare organizations, and negatively impact rural economies that depend on equine activity.

The consequences of inaction include declining horse welfare, reduced economic output, and the continued accumulation of preventable expenses associated with poor nutrition and inefficient management. Another factor reducing equine systems profitability is poor pasture management. Improper pasture management (e.g., overgrazing, inadequate nutrient and stocking-rate management, and lack of resting) reduces forage quantity and quality, increases reliance on purchased supplemental feed, such as hay and concentrates, and thereby raises feeding and overall horse-production costs (Macleay and Buckley, 2019; Ringmark et al., 2019).

A multistate approach is essential because economic pressures and management decisions are influenced by climate, forage systems, regional feed costs, facility designs, and state policies. A coordinated effort enables comparative analysis, broader applicability of findings, and collectively developed educational tools that can be disseminated regionally. Successful completion will result in improved cost efficiency, enhanced welfare outcomes, more resilient equine businesses, and better-informed decision-making across diverse equine communities.

1. Rising expenses in horse operations

Justification: Despite the overall industry growth, costs associated with horsekeeping have surged, placing increasing financial pressure on individual owners and operations. According to a report comparing 2003–2016 data from the American Horse Council, the annual cost of owning a horse in the U.S. rose during that period: for show horses, from US$3,186 (2003) to US$24,239 (2016); for recreational horses, from US$2,319 to US$6,710 (datapaddock.com) Even under modest care regimes, the combination of feed, facility maintenance, veterinary care, and other routine expenses places horse ownership far beyond a casual hobby for many.

These rising costs have been confirmed by stakeholder feedback. An unpublished 2024 equine needs assessment conducted at Penn State University identified the top three most important and challenging issues in the equine industry. The most frequently chosen issues were all related to costs of horse-keeping. These responses reflect on-the-ground realities: owners, small operations, and welfare organizations increasingly struggle with escalating feed prices, maintenance, veterinary bills, and facility overhead.

2. Assess horse nutrition practices and develop cost-saving feeding strategies

Justification: Forage access and feeding efficiency are primary cost drivers for nearly all equine operations. Systematic monitoring of hay markets, coupled with research on feeding efficiency and waste reduction, is critical to improving producer financial resilience. These efforts provide producers with reliable benchmarks, predictive insights, and actionable recommendations. In years of drought or supply shortages, timely data help prevent urgent welfare compromises by informing early purchasing, storage, and pasture strategies. Without this objective, financial strain and preventable welfare issues related to forage scarcity will continue to escalate.

3. Grazing land management:

Justification: Pastures represent the most cost-effective and nutritionally valuable feed resources to horse owners, making grazing land a central economic pillar of equine operations. Yet many farms struggle to implement effective grazing practices, leading to wasted forage, higher feeding expenditures, and declining pasture productivity and persistence. Rising feeding prices, high veterinary and care costs, and the limitations of small or suburban acreage make efficient forage use even more critical for horse owners. Challenges such as uneven grazing pressure, poor soil fertility, and lack of management knowledge often translate into preventable financial losses and reduced overall farm resilience.

Feed remains one of the largest recurring expenses in any livestock operation, and poorly managed pastures increase dependence on costly hay and concentrates, particularly during winter or drought periods. Improving grazing-land management through strategies like rotational grazing, integrating warm- and cool-season forages, and optimizing soil fertility can extend the grazing season, improve forage quality, and reduce the need for supplemental feed. Research across forage systems shows that practices enhancing pasture productivity, nitrogen-use efficiency, and plant persistence yield strong economic returns, and these benefits directly apply to equine farms where even modest reductions in supplemental feeding can significantly lower annual operating costs. Together, these points highlight the need for strong, coordinated research, outreach, and education in grazing-land management to help horse farms stay economically viable, reduce their dependence on purchased feeds, and build more resilient equine businesses.

4. Multistate Extension resources

Justification: While academic publications provide essential information and rigor, they are not the primary information source for most horse owners or managers. Rather, this group depends on Extension bulletins, webinars, workshops, podcasts, and short-form digital resources that can be readily applied in daily operations. A multistate dissemination effort will close the gap between research and producer-level application. Additionally, this approach ensures that educational resources reflect diverse management systems and economic realities.  The development and dissemination of Extension resources are an essential part of this multistate effort. These materials serve as the primary mechanism through which research findings reach stakeholders, influence management practices, and generate measurable improvements in economic resilience and equine welfare.

 

Related, Current and Previous Work

This project builds directly on prior multistate collaborations focused on equine nutrition, grazing systems, welfare, and decision-support tools (NE1041, NE1441, NE1941). These projects have generated foundational knowledge on pasture management, forage quality, climate impacts, and the economics of livestock systems. The present proposal extends this work by integrating economic resilience and environmental considerations specifically relevant to the equine sector.

Previous studies demonstrate meaningful economic impacts from management education. Skelly et al. (2011) showed that 31% of participants in Michigan adopted cost-saving practices, while Delaware and Midwest studies reported substantial interest in nutrition, pasture management, biosecurity, and disease prevention- all areas where improved management results in measurable financial benefits (Wickens et al, 2011; Mastellar et al., 2018). 

Together, these activities provide a coordinated platform to address the multifaceted drivers of cost and risk in horsekeeping.

Grazing land management:

Implementing thoughtful grazing management strategies is essential not only for maintaining pasture health but also for strengthening the economic sustainability of equine operations. Research has consistently shown that managing the area available for grazing through rotational systems can substantially improve forage production and nutritive value compared with continuous grazing (Williams et al., 2020). Studies across cool-season (Webb et al., 2009; Kenny, 2016), warm-season (Webb et al., 2011), and mixed-species pastures (Daniel et al., 2015) indicate that rotational stocking increases total forage mass and lengthens the grazing period. These improvements reduce the need to purchase hay or concentrate feeds, thereby lowering operating costs. Rotational systems have also been linked with healthier pasture composition, including a greater presence of desirable forage species (Virostek et al., 2015) and improved ground cover (Kenny, 2016), which can decrease the long-term expenses associated with pasture renovation efforts.

Building on these benefits, overseeding can serve as an additional strategy to maintain productive, high-quality stands. Sod-seeding, introducing compatible species into existing pastures, offers a sustainable approach to rejuvenate forage systems and enhance botanical diversity without the cost or soil disturbance associated with complete renovation (Rueda-Ayala and Höglind, 2019). By filling gaps in thinning stands and improving overall forage availability and nutritive value, overseeding helps extend grazing capacity and delay more expensive renovation interventions, supporting both pasture longevity and economic efficiency.

Beyond improving pasture composition and productivity, adjusting the number of hours horses are allowed to graze each day is another strategy that supports forage conservation and economic efficiency. Limiting grazing time helps match feed intake to nutritional requirements, preventing excess energy consumption while slowing pasture depletion. Evidence shows that mature idle light-breed horses grazing between 9 and 12 hours per day typically consume enough to meet maintenance digestible energy needs without exceeding them (Dowler et al., 2012; Siciliano, 2012; Bowman et al., 2017). This reduction in daily intake, estimated at about 5 kg of dry matter for a 500-kg horse when access is restricted to 9–12 hours (Siciliano, 2012), can equate to roughly 20 additional grazing days within a single month. Extending grazing time in this way directly cuts back on supplemental feed purchases, providing clear financial benefits.

Incorporating alternative forage species can also contribute to greater economic resilience. Studies examining annual grasses, including teff, show that these species can effectively lengthen the grazing season in northern regions (DeBoer et al., 2017; Grev et al., 2017). Teff, in particular, has been associated with more favorable glucose and insulin dynamics in horses during the fall and late fall (DeBoer et al., 2018), which may have longer-term health and management advantages. In the Southeast, incorporating rhizoma peanut into bahiagrass pastures enabled a 75% reduction in nitrogen fertilizer use without affecting forage production. This mixed system also improved forage nutritive value and produced similar or more favorable fecal and blood metabolites compared with high-fertilizer bahiagrass monocultures in equine grazing systems (120 kg N ha⁻¹; Vasco et al., 2023; 2025).

Collectively, practices such as rotational stocking, overseeding, controlled grazing duration, and the use of alternative forages enhance forage efficiency, reduce feed costs, and support the economic sustainability of horse operations while maintaining horse and pasture health.

Objectives

1. Conduct a multistate longitudinal survey to identify major social and cost drivers, management practices, welfare concerns, and economic pressures across diverse equine operations.
   
2. Assess horse nutrition practices and develop cost-saving feeding strategies, including hay price monitoring and decision-support tools.
   
3. Develop and evaluate cost-effective pasture, forage, climate-adaptive management strategies to reduce feed-related expenses and improve forage utilization.
   
4. Develop and disseminate multistate Extension resources (webinars, fact sheets, tools) targeted at reducing horsekeeping costs and improving welfare outcomes.
   

Methods

Objective 1: 

Survey Development: Penn State University (PSU), in collaboration with university economics faculty, will lead survey design and IRB development. The survey will include validated question types (Likert items, ranking questions, cost-reporting and management practices fields). Survey topics will include: Top equine operational expenses; Forage, feed, and pasture management practices; Facility management costs; Health-related expenditures; Perceived barriers to implementing cost-saving strategies; Welfare concerns and resource gaps; Climate-related impacts on forage availability and costs. Draft survey tools (e.g. Qualtrics) will undergo review by the multistate technical committee and pilot testing (n=5-10 participants). Revisions will be made based on participant feedback.

Survey Administration: Each participating institution (UMaine, Penn State, Kentucky, Florida, Montana, and partners) will distribute the survey through Extension networks, equine associations, social media, email listservs, and industry events. Multiple dissemination efforts (initial email, 1-week reminder, 3-week reminder) will maximize response rates. Sampling will target a broad cross-section of equine owners, trainers, boarding facilities, welfare organizations, rescues, and industry professionals. Each state will aim for 75 responses, generating a projected dataset of 375 respondents across the project.

Longitudinal Design: The survey will be repeated every two years to track: Changing cost structures; Adoption of cost-saving practices; Emerging welfare and management needs; Economic impacts of feed prices, climate variability, veterinary costs, and facility investments; The effectiveness of educational interventions; and shifts in operational financial resilience.
Unique (non-identifying) participant codes will allow voluntary participation while protecting confidentiality.

Data Analysis: Confidential data will be pooled into a shared multistate repository. Analysis, guided by economic faculty partners, will include: Descriptive statistics of costs and practices; Multivariate regression linking cost outcomes to management decisions; Mixed-effects modeling for longitudinal changes; Correlation of forage and hay pricing with geography and climate indicators; Pre/post comparisons of adoption of recommended best practices. All institutions will participate in data interpretation and multistate synthesis. 

Objective 2: 

Hay Price Monitoring and Modeling: Participating states will collect annual hay and forage price data from farm surveys, Extension reports, and agricultural market listings. A standardized protocol will capture bale type, weight, forage species, quality grade, and regional availability. These data will be integrated into economic models that estimate feeding costs under varying forage qualities, supply constraints, and seasonal fluctuations.

Feeding-Efficiency Research: Feeding-efficiency studies evaluating storage losses, feeding systems (round-bale feeders, slow-feed nets, rationed vs. free-choice), and supplemental feeding requirements relative to forage quality. Data will include dry-matter intake, waste percentage, time budgets, and cost per unit of nutrition delivered. One specific project is listed below. 

Project #1: Investigate the effect of different proportions of alfalfa-bermudagrass hay as single sources of nutrition in diets of mature horses. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the effect of these proportions on diet cost effectiveness, diet digestibility, blood and fecal variables, and feeding behavior of mature horses. This study also aims to identify the optimum proportion of alfalfa-bermudagrass for maximum diet utilization and welfare. Project #1 methodology: Dietary treatments will consist of four hay treatments with different proportions of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and Bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.], with increasing levels of alfalfa as: 0, 34, 66, and 100 % alfalfa. Treatments will be tested in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square with 20-day experimental periods using eight mature horses and offered at 2% of horses’ body weight into three meals. Horses will have free access to fresh water and be provided with vitamin and mineral supplementation daily. Within each experimental period, after a 14-day adaptation phase, a 24-h time-budget behavioral observation (Martin & Bateson, 2007), and bite and chew rates, will be conducted on day 14. On days 15-19, total fecal and urine collection will be conducted for measuring diet digestibility and nitrogen and water balance (Vasco et al., 2021).On day 20, fecal and blood variables pre- and post-feeding responses will be measured in blood samples (insulin, glucose, blood urea nitrogen, total plasma protein and lactate) that will be collected by jugular venipuncture and fecal samples (dry matter, lactate, pH, short-chain fatty acids, and ammonia-nitrogen) that will be collected directly from rectum (Vasco et al, 2026). Diet cost-effectiveness will be measured as cost per unit of nutrient [digestible energy (DE) and crude protein (CP)] supplied, feed cost per day per horse, hay efficiency ratio (DE or CP delivered/cost of hay, estimated cost of health risk reduction - which will be measured based on the pre- and post-feeding responses of the fecal and blood variables, and cost efficiency of nitrogen use and environmental economics (value of reduced economic excretion and water balance), among others. Data will be tested for normal distribution using the Shapiro–Wilk test and submitted to analysis of variance using the GLIMMIX procedure in SAS (SAS Inst. Inc, Cary, NC). Data from the 24-hour time budget assessment will be submitted to ANOVA with repeated measures using the MIXED procedure with the REPEATED statement in SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). The model will include square, period, treatment, hour, and treatment x hour as fixed effects and horse(square) as random effect when testing the effect of hay and time of day on mean hourly feeding, inactivity, and other activities duration. For hay treatment effect on diurnal, nocturnal, and total daily duration of feeding, inactivity, and other activities, chew rate, bite rate, and frequency of drinking, urination, and defecation, data will be submitted to ANOVA using the MIXED procedure in SAS. Square, period, horse(square), and hay treatment will be included in the model as fixed effects. Nutrient intake and digestibility variables, as well as the economical analysis variables, will be calculated by day, and statistical analysis will be performed on the 5-d average for each collection within a period. The model will include square, period, horse(square), and hay treatment as fixed effects. Data from the fecal and blood variables post-feeding responses, data will be analyzed as a replicated Latin-square design with repeated measures arrangement using the MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Square, horse(square), hay treatment, and period will be considered blocking factors in the replicated Latin-square design. The model for repeated measures analysis will include square, period, hay, hour, and hay x hour as fixed effects, with hour as the repeated measure. Horse(square) will be considered a random effect. A Tukey’s post hoc test will be used to determine differences between the means for all significant effects.

Decision-Support Tools and Business Resources: Economic modeling results will be used to develop user-friendly decision-support resources such as ration-cost calculators, hay-price dashboards, and feeding strategy comparison tools. Additional business planning materials (i.e., budget templates, cash-flow tools, and modules for the online Equine Business Course) will be collaboratively authored, piloted by equine managers, and disseminated across states.

 

Objective 3: 

Grazing Research and Field Trials: Plots and large-scale grazing studies will be conducted to evaluate forage species and pasture establishment, or renovation, effects on system economic and overall sustainability.  Project #1: Determine the effect of sod-seeding aged perennial-warm season grass plots with different legumes on forage productivity, nutritive value, and ecosystem services. Grazing tolerance of these forage systems will also be determined by mob grazing them. Project #1 methodology: plots of bromegrass (Bromus spp.) alone or sod-seeded with alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.), birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.) will be replicated three times in a randomized complete block design and repeated for two years. To allow for measurements of grazing tolerance, each third of the 23 ft x 148 ft plots will be randomly assigned to one of the three grazing treatments: non-grazed (control), cattle grazed, or horse grazed in a split-plot design. Grazed treatments will be mob grazed. Grazing frequency and data collection will be determined by forage phenology. Three to five grazing events/data collection are expected per year. Forage measurements will include herbage mass, botanical composition, NIRS nutrient composition, biological nitrogen fixation, and root mass. In vitro digestibility assay will be conducted using bovine and equine inocula. Soil characteristics will include carbon and nitrogen, using an elemental analyzer, and soil compaction, that will be measured as soil strength. The most successful mixture will be advanced to a large-scale grazing study (Project #2). Project #2: Determine the effect of sod-seeding aged perennial-warm season grass pastures with different legumes on forage productivity, nutritive value, animal performance and ecosystem services. Project #2 methodology: treatment pastures will include bromegrass alone or sod-seeded with the successful legume from projet #1.  Pastures will be replicated three times in a randomized complete block design and repeated for two years. Each pasture will be divided into three paddocks and assigned to one of the grazing treatments: non-grazed (control), cattle grazed, or horse grazed in a split-plot design. Paddocks will be grazed using the rotational stocking method. Animals will be removed from the pastures when recommended post-grazing stubble height is achieved and kept in a dry lot and supplemented with hay while pastures are ready to be grazed again, which will be determined by forage phenology. Forage measurements frequency will be determined by forage phenology and include herbage mass, botanical composition, NIRS nutrient composition, biological nitrogen fixation, and root mass. Soil characteristics will include carbon and nitrogen, using an elemental analyzer, and soil compaction, that will be measured as soil strength. Intake and digestibility will be measured using the dual marker technique. Animal performance will be measured as frequently as forage measurements and determined by body weight and condition score. Project #3: Determine the nutritive value and acceptability of limpograss [Hemarthria altissima (Poir.) Stapf & C.E. Hubb.] for horses and compare it to forages commonly used in horse pastures in the Southeast (bermudagrass and bahiagrass). Project #3 methodology: Limpograss plots will be established in different horse operations and measured for forage yield, nutritive value, and acceptability/preference. Before the grazing events, forage yield and nutritive value samples will be collected by hand plucking random duplicate 20 x 20 in areas to a height of 10 inches. Samples will be dried at 60°C for 24 hours to determine dry matter and subsequently ground at 2 mm and shipped to a commercial laboratory for nutritional composition. Digestibility will be measured in vitro using equine fecal fluid as the inoculum for incubation. Initiation of the grazing season will be determined based on forage phenology and the grazing duration in hours will be determined based on estimated available forage (Glunk & Siciliano, 2011). Forage acceptability will be determined by visually assessing the percentage of available forage biomass removal on a scale of 0 (no grazing activity) to 100 (100% of the existing vegetation grazed down to 10 cm) as described by Allen et al. (2013). 

Economic Analysis of Grazing Strategies: For the plot and grazing projects performed, economic metrics computed will include: establishment cost per acre (seed, sod-seeding labor, fertilizer and herbicide costs), annual maintenance cost per acre (dragging, fertilizer, herbicide, reseeding, and labor), forage yield per acre, grazing days per acre, and hay saved (lb and $/horse/grazing season), cost per unit of ecosystem services ($ per t of CO2 sequestration, $ per lb of N biologically fixed, and $ saved with avoided fertilizer), ecosystem services per dollar invested, and total feeding cost per animal per day, among others.

Objective 4: 

Resource Development and Dissemination: Each institution will develop educational resources tailored to their regional clientele, including fact sheets, webinars, budget tools, pasture tools, and business planning guides. Materials will reference data collected through surveys and applied research, focusing on actionable cost-saving strategies. States will share resources, and each institution will disseminate materials within their geographic region. An annual conference will be held to share results with equine stakeholders. 

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• Analyzed Survey Results Comments: A multistate longitudinal dataset will be developed to capture detailed information on equine management costs and evolving industry needs. These data will be complemented by analyzed survey reports produced every two years, providing ongoing insight into economic and management trends.
• Forage and Hay Price Monitoring Tools Comments: Forage and hay price data from local and regional sources will be collected regularly and will be available in a user-friendly format for equine managers.
• Asynchronous Business Course Comments: An online asynchronous business course will be developed and disseminated to equine industry practitioners.
• Extension Outreach and Resources Comments: Extension-focused outputs will consist of educational materials such as fact sheets, webinars, written articles, business-planning tools, and podcasts designed to deliver practical, research-based guidance to producers. Research findings will be prepared for submission to peer-reviewed journals, ensuring scientific rigor and broad dissemination. Annual conferences held across the participating states that will bring stakeholders together to learn about project results. The project will culminate in a final multistate integrated report summarizing economic, welfare, and management findings across all participating regions.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Short-Term Short-term outcomes include measurable increases in producer awareness of cost-effective horsekeeping strategies and documented adoption of recommended best-management practices (BMPs) related to feeding, forage selection, pasture care, welfare efforts, and facility design. Stakeholders will gain improved capacity to interpret economic trends such as hay price fluctuations and veterinary cost inflation.
• Medium-Term Medium-term outcomes are expected to include quantifiable cost savings among equine operations that adopt evidence-based management strategies. Welfare outcomes will improve among equine rescues and welfare organizations as a result of better resource allocation and diagnostic clarity. Increased financial resilience among small and mid-size equine operations will reflect more efficient management and better-informed decision-making.
• Long-Term Long-term impacts include strengthened regional and national equine economic stability. Ultimately, these impacts contribute to a more sustainable, economically viable, and welfare-centered equine industry. Progress will be assessed using quantitative indicators such as percentage reductions in feeding and forage costs, and changes in adoption rates of recommended BMPs. Additional indicators include the percentage of operations reporting improved financial stability and the total dollar value of documented cost savings across longitudinal survey efforts.

Milestones

(2027):Milestone 1 (Oct 2026–Sept 2027): (a) Survey Instrument Development, Testing, IRB Approvals, and Initial Distribution; (b) IACUC Approval and Some Project Activities. (a) During the first project year, the multistate team will collaboratively design the longitudinal survey instrument, incorporating economic, welfare, and management measures. Activities include pilot testing, instrument refinement based on stakeholder feedback, and completion of all required Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals across participating institutions. Upon approval, states will coordinate the initial survey distribution using Extension networks, industry partners, and equine organizations. Completion of this milestone is essential before data collection, longitudinal tracking, and subsequent modeling can begin. (b) Project leaders will work on their individual Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)/Agriculture Animal Care and Use Committee (AACUC) before initiation of any research activity with animals. Some projects will be implemented in 2027, such as project #1 listed under objective 2.

(2028):Milestone 2 (Oct 2027–Mar 2028): (a) Initial Survey Data Cleaning, Analysis, Multistate Synthesis, and Results Dissemination; (b) Additional IACUC Approval and Other Project Activities. (a) Following data collection, participating institutions will collaboratively clean, verify, and pool responses into a shared multistate repository. Initial analyses will include descriptive statistics, regional comparisons, and identification of priority economic and welfare challenges. This milestone enables the team to determine early patterns in management costs, forage access, facility investments, and welfare concerns. Completion of this analysis is necessary for refining research directions, prioritizing field studies, and informing the development of educational resources. Results from the initial survey effort will be shared via Extension pathways, such as webinars or articles. (b) Project leaders will work on their individual Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)/Agriculture Animal Care and Use Committee (AACUC) before initiation of any research activity with animals.

(2029):Milestone 3 (Apr 2028–Sept 2029): (a) Development and Implementation of Follow-Up Research (Nutrition & Forage Studies); (b) Biennial Survey Re-Administration and Longitudinal Trend Analysis. (a) Building on initial survey insights, the team will launch targeted research initiatives across states after IACUC/AACUC approval. These include forage and hay price monitoring, feeding-efficiency studies, and pasture and grazing system evaluations. Completion of these research activities is required before developing national recommendations and decision-support tools. (b) At the project midpoint, the survey will be repeated to track shifts in economic pressures, adoption of best management practices, changes in welfare challenges, and impacts of earlier Extension interventions. Completion of this milestone enables longitudinal modeling and measurement of overall project impact.

(2030):Milestone 4 (Oct 2029–Sept 2030): Development of Extension Tools and Producer Resources. As research outputs emerge, the team will generate coordinated educational materials, including fact sheets, webinars, producer guides, feeding calculators, and forage budgeting tools. An online asynchronous business course will be developed. Multistate collaboration ensures consistency across regions while allowing for climate-specific adaptations. Completion of this milestone is essential prior to broad dissemination and evaluation of producer adoption.

(2031):Milestone 6 (Oct 2030–Sept 2031): Final Multistate Integration, Impact Assessment, and Report Development. In the final project year, data from all research streams-survey results, forage and nutrition studies, pasture management trials, footing modeling, and technology validation- will be synthesized into a comprehensive multistate report. This milestone supports development of policy recommendations, industry guidance documents, and final Extension outputs. Completion of this milestone marks the end of the project and establishes the foundation for future multistate collaborations.

Projected Participation

View Participation Form/Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

Results will be disseminated through a coordinated multistate Extension network using webinars, fact sheets, digital tools, producer workshops, peer-reviewed publications, and presentations at regional and national equine industry conferences. Tools such as cost calculators, budgeting templates, and footing decision models will be made freely accessible online. Educational materials will be developed to meet accessibility standards, including plain-language summaries and closed-captioned video formats.

Special emphasis will be placed on reaching underserved rural communities, small-scale owners, and equine welfare organizations that experience disproportionate financial strain. Partnerships with state horse councils, rescues, Cooperative Extension, and community groups will ensure broad outreach. The project will engage peer groups to facilitate rapid translation of research findings into practice. Multistate collaboration ensures that outputs serve diverse ecological and economic contexts.

Organization/Governance

Committee of the Whole

Chair- Dr. Robert Causey, UMaine

Secretary- Dr. Rachel White, UMaine

 

Survey Subcommittee

Nutrition Subcommittee

Literature Cited

Allen, E., C. Sheaffer, and K. Martinson. 2013. Forage nutritive value and preference of cool-season grasses under horse grazing. Agronomy Journal, 105(3), 679–684. doi:10.2134/agronj2012.0300.

American Horse Council. 2024. Results from the 2023 National Equine Economic Impact Study released. AHC Press Release. The American Horse Council

American Horse Council. (n.d.). 2023 Economic Impact of the Horse Industry in the USA – Summary report. The American Horse Council

Bowman, M. A., J. L. Moore, and P. D. Siciliano. 2017. Effect of restricting time allowed for grazing on fecal microbial fermentation parameters. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 52, 82. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2017.03.110.

Daniel, A. D., B. J. McIntosh, J. D. Plunk, M. Webb, D. McIntosh, and A. G. Parks. 2015. Effects of rotational grazing on water-soluble carbohydrate and energy content of horse pastures. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 35, 385-386 (Abstr.). doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2015.03.014.

DataPaddock. (2016). Annual cost of owning a horse in the U.S., 2003 versus 2016. Retrieved from https://datapaddock.com/cost-of-owning-a-horse-in-the-us-2003-versus-2016-ahc/

DeBoer, M. L., M. R. Hathaway, K. J. Kuhle, P. S. D. Weber, A. S. Reiter, C. C. Sheaffer, M. S. Wells, and K. L. Martinson. 2018. Glucose and Insulin Response of Horses Grazing Alfalfa, Perennial Cool-Season Grass, and Teff Across Seasons. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 68, 33–38. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2018.04.008.

DeBoer, M. L., C. C. Sheaffer, A. M. Grev, D. N. Catalano, M. S. Wells, M. R. Hathaway, and K. L. Martinson. 2017. Yield, Nutritive Value, and Preference of Annual Warm-Season Grasses Grazed by Horses. Agronomy Journal, 109, 2136. doi:10.2134/agronj2017.02.0099.

Dowler, L. E., P. D. Siciliano, S. E. Pratt-Phillips, and M. Poore. 2012. Determination of Pasture Dry Matter Intake Rates in Different Seasons and Their Application in Grazing Management. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 32, 85–92. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2011.06.006.

Glunk, E.C., and P.D. Siciliano. 2011. Effect of restricted grazing on dry matter intake rate.Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 31(5–6), 296–297. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2011.03.124

Grev, A. M., C. C. Sheaffer, M. L. DeBoer, D. N. Catalano, and K. L. Martinson. 2017. Preference, Yield, and Forage Nutritive Value of Annual Grasses under Horse Grazing. Kenny, L. B. 2016. The effects of rotational and continuous grazing on horses, pasture condition, and soil properties (Master’s thesis). Rutgers University, Graduate School–New Brunswick. Retrieved from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/49246/

Macleay, C., and Buckley, P. 2019. Poor pasture management results in Australian horse owners using expensive daily supplementary feeding. In 19th Australian Agronomy Conference 2019. Australian Society of Agronomy.

Mastellar, S. L., Rosenthal, E. J., Carroll, H. K., and Bott-Knutson, R. C. 2018. Assessment of Equine Feeding Practices and Knowledge of Equine Nutrition in the Midwest. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 62, 109–115. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2017.12.007.

Martin, P., & Bateson, P. 2007. Recording methods. Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide.

Ringmark, S., Skarin, A., and Jansson, A. 2019. Impact of year-round grazing by horses on pasture nutrient dynamics and the correlation with pasture nutrient content and fecal nutrient composition. Animals, 9(8), 500. doi:10.3390/ani9080500.

Rueda-Ayala, V. P. andHöglind, M. 2019. Determining thresholds for grassland renovation by sod-seeding. Agronomy,  9(12), 842. doi: 10.3390/agronomy9120842.

Siciliano, P. D. 2012. Estimation of pasture dry matter intake and its practical application in grazing management for horses. In: Proc. 10th Mid-Atlantic Nutrition Conference. N.G. Zimmermann ed., Timonium, MA.

Skelly, C., Bodle, A., Heyboer, G., and Lambur, M. 2011. Measuring Impact and Subscriber Engagement of an Extension Electronic Newsletter. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 31(5–6), 339–340. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2011.03.181.

Penn State University 2024 Equine needs assessment — unpublished data, internal report.

Vasco, A. C. C., Brinkley-Bissinger, K. J., Bobel, J. M., Dubeux Jr, J. C., Warren, L. K., & Wickens, C. L. (2021). Digestibility and nitrogen and water balance in horses fed rhizoma peanut hay. Journal of Animal Science, 99(11), skab284.

Vasco, A. C., Dubeux, J., Sollenberger, L., Wallau, M., Santos, E., Lance, J., Warren, L., and Wickens, C. 2023. Diurnal Variation in Forage Nutrient Composition and Metabolic Parameters of Horses Grazing Warm-Season, Perennial Grass-Legume Mixed Pastures. In Proc. XXV International Grasslands Congress. Covington, KY.

Vasco, A. C. C. M., da Silva Santos, E. R., Batista Dubeux Junior, J. C., Sollenberger, L. E., Wallau, M. O., Soares Vasco Neto, H. L., Lance, L. M., Warren, L. K., and Wickens, C. L. 2025. Herbage Responses and Grazing Performance of Mature Horses in Warm-Season Perennial Grass–Legume Mixed Pastures. Grasses, 4(2), 15. doi:10.3390/grasses4020015.

Virostek, A. M., B. McIntosh, A. Daniel, M. Webb, and J. D. Plunk. 2015. The effects of rotational grazing on forage biomass yield and botanical composition of horse pastures. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 35, 386. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2015.03.015.

Webb, G., C. Duey, and S. Webb. 2009. Continuous vs. Rotational Grazing of Cool Season Pastures by Adult Horses.Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 29, 388–389. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2009.04.090.

Webb, G., S. Webb, C. Duey, and K. Minton. 2011. Continuous vs. Rotational Grazing of Cool Season Pastures During the Summer Months. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 31, 285. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2011.03.109.

Wickens, C., Waite, K., Garey, S., and Fraze, S. 2011. An assessment of the educational needs of Delaware equine owners. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 31(5–6), 332–333. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2011.03.172.

Williams, C. A., Kenny, L. B., Weinert, J. R., Sullivan, K., Meyer, W., and Robson, M. G. 2020. Effects of 27 mo of rotational vs. continuous grazing on horse and pasture condition. Translational Animal Science, 4(3), txaa084. Doi: 10.1093/tas/txaa084.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

FL, ME, MT, PA

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions